Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Interesting -- I missed that patch, but it seems like a better approach. > Are you already reviewing Pavel's patch, or is it something I could take > a look at?
The main objection I have is that I don't think changing the definition of pg_proc.proargmodes is a good idea --- that will break some nontrivial amount of client-side code in order to support a distinction that seems unimportant. IMHO anyway. Feel free to take a whack at it. regards, tom lane ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match